Has anyone mentioned that seeing Bush’s collective responses in the debate from beginning to end reveal a sloppy impression, but when chopped up into sound bite clips - bush looks really good? Sounds like a good Hughes/Rove strategy if you are facing the best debater since Cicero!

Good point - Bush definitely had some moments. The Dems are already putting together their greatest hits clips of Bush from the debate looking annoyed and/or "smirking" - a highlight reel put together by Rove of his strong points should more than offset the cult of personality lefty types.

I think Bush's biggest mistake was his over-reliance on the 'flip-flop'/'inconsistent' remarks. He mentioned that Kerry was inconsistent so frequently that it was obvious he was making an effort to work it in to his answers. As a debate strategy, there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you don't substitute ham-handedness for subtlety.

The subtelty is an important piece of the equation. Otherwise, statements like "the only thing consistent about his position is that he's been inconsistent" will fall pretty flat.

Obviously, I'm a partisan, so it's hard for me to gauge how the debate played to the undecided voters. I actually watched most of the debate in the baggage claim of MSP International Airport, along with a revolving group of about 30 fellow travelers. There wasn't much conversation, but I really felt like Kerry was drawing people in. For all I know, they were already rabid, left-wing partisans, but I got the impression that a lot of them were seeing Kerry in a new light.

I felt like he was direct and concise when making his points. Contrary to the initial CW, I didn't really feel that Kerry had Bush on the defensive, although the initial polls seem to indicate otherwise.

If we're grading by points, I think Kerry won by a small margin. However, if we're grading on how well he countered his newfound reputation for being indecisive, I think he scored pretty well. One train of thought about the recent round of polls is that Bush hasn't pulled voters over as much as Kerry has pushed them away. If some of the initial indicators we are seeing are correct, Kerry may have effectively started to counter that impression.

Let the post-debate spin begin!

Andy, I think your analysis is pretty solid all around. The debate went almost exactly as I expected it would. This type of thing is obviously a strong suit for Kerry. For Bush, not so much. I think there will be some initial upside for Kerry - he certainly didn't hurt himself.

I was astonished by how similar last night's debate was to the 2000 debates. Kerry/Gore, so polished and forceful. Bush, so fumbling but sincere.

What is the obvious implication?

C makes a useful observation. Substantively, Kerry stunk up the joint, but the flowery presentation offset that. Kerry still presented no plan for Iraq, and somehow expects us to believe that he can get others unbribed and non-coerced countries to join our fraudulent coalition in a war that he says is the wrong one in the wrong place at the wrong time. That is a pretty shitty sales pitch, no matter how smoothly delivered. He also has no answer for Bush on North Korea. The Dems criticize Bush for acting unliaterally, yet that is what Kerry says we should do with Iran and Iraq. Does anyone really believe he would do anything more than Clinton did? Remember Albright sipping champagne with Kim Jung Il while he was developing the capability to create nukes? No, I don't think many minds were changed last night. Only those with a weak grasp of the issues and the candidates' stances were likely to be swayed by style points in a debate.